Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > The Universe / UFOs / IFOs / Crop Circles

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-09-2014, 04:16 PM   #61
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by headlikearock View Post
Which part of the story are you referring to?
The aborted Blue Streak missile launches at Woomera.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2014, 05:35 PM   #62
headlikearock
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 599
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post
According to Jenny Randles, Jim Templeton took another photo on the marsh weeks after the famous one which she believed showed nothing more than a lens flare. She has suggested that Templeton may have misinterpreted communications from Australia and wrongly assumed they were interested in his 'spaceman' photograph because something similar happened at Woomera, when in fact they were referring to the lens flare image he took which matched one recorded at the launch site.

This doesn't make any sense to me because Templeton only came to prominence because of his 'spaceman' photo and authorities on the other side of the world would hardly be interested in him and establish contact because he had taken a dime-a-dozen photograph of flaring light.
No, that doesn't make sense to me either. I think Jenny Randles may be wrong on this one.

From what I can gather, it was the Cumberland News who approached Templeton and asked if they could borrow the negative. This was after the picture had been published in Australia and the Woomera technicians had said the figures on their screen looked the same as the one in the photo. I don't know anything about Templeton's second trip to the marsh, but I've seen Pathe video footage of the launch and it has all the hallmarks of a lens flare.
headlikearock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 12:24 AM   #63
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by headlikearock View Post
No, that doesn't make sense to me either. I think Jenny Randles may be wrong on this one.

From what I can gather, it was the Cumberland News who approached Templeton and asked if they could borrow the negative. This was after the picture had been published in Australia and the Woomera technicians had said the figures on their screen looked the same as the one in the photo. I don't know anything about Templeton's second trip to the marsh, but I've seen Pathe video footage of the launch and it has all the hallmarks of a lens flare.
Yes, that seems right, at least according to Jim Templeton.

I've compiled Jenny Randles remarks over the course of a few years on the issues we're discussing from the youtube comments section under the clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAIEeufAdtw) - a lot of good, clarifying information here, assembled for the first time...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenny Randles
Also consider the following: Jim worked with the police taking images of fire scenes. That is why they took him seriously and launched a forensic investigation at their Penrith labs. Those suggesting this was all a joke by Jim using a photo he made up consider the implications for his job if he happily allowed them to waste weeks of time and effort. This is why I think IF this is a hoax it was by someone else ON Jim and they chickened out of confessing when the police made a case out of it.

As for Jim making up the 'spaceman in Australia' story. He did not. In fact the police told him that something had been seen during a Blue Streak launch at Woomera and captured on camera thus why the Ministry were interested in his case. I suspect it was a way to pass on responsibility of the case as the police had spent weeks doing forensic investigation into it because Jim was a trusted colleague. They had failed to solve it but wanted rid of the PR. So told Jim it was the MoD case now.

[...]

These atmospherics get reported in cases of a 'time slip' - where a scene out of time is allegedly witnessed. I theorise it is a symptom of space/time distortion temporarily occurring locally. Hence - perhaps - that the camera caught an image with a slight phase shift - or a blink in space-time. Deep speculation, obviously. Sadly I expect we will never know. Though the two men (allegedly from the government) who visited Jim did ask about the atmospheric conditions as if this clue mattered.

[...]

Debunked - as in someone has a theory. It has NOT been in the least proven it was his wife walking away and she does not think it was. I have no idea what the photo shows but wishful thinking is as rife amongst sceptics as believers. I am neither. Just interested in the truth and not convinced this theory you refer to is that

[...]

The daughter was facing away from the figure at all times. Jim's wife and his other daughter were present looking toward where the figure was but also saw nothing. This is why the search for a solution focused on the idea of a double exposure with the figure added that way. Otherwise it should have been witnessed at the time. But several attempts to prove this failed. If it was a hoax I think someone did it on Jim. He did not fake it himself. Police involvement may have scared off a confession.

[...]

Kodak's offer was made in a different world when trickery had less opportunity. They considered a double exposure and were puzzled. Which is not to say someone could not have faked it in a way that was missed. I just do not think Jim would do so and risk all by working with the police. Kodak UK have been a big help over UFO film cases with me (as discussed in cases in some of my books - eg the Cuddington film in 'The UFOs that Never Were')These days I expect Kodak could not afford this expense.

[...]

I agree. The BBC tried to trace their 'can missing' file but there was no record of who took it - or when. I will post if I can add anything but these days I am out of the loop, having to stop my writing and lecturing 9 years ago when I became a full time carer. So if I do not reply quickly, please excuse as that will be the reason,

[...]

The daughter has no problem with the story as suggested. In fact as observed she had her back to the 'figure' so wouod never have seen it. That is if it was ever actually visible to anyone present at all. If it was a hoax (by someone on Jim, such as a fellow fireman) it was likely added during processing. That has always been the most viable explanation - though never proven. Another daughter was present with the mother BOTH watching Jim take the photo. Neither of them saw anything that day.

[...]

Both IMO are probably lens flares. However, you can see why the government might conceivably have been interested in the coincidence of two images thousands of miles apart both at sites connected with Britain's Blue Streak missile programme. Especially as the taker of one had also taken the 'spaceman' photo there weeks earlier. Or passing the buck to the government this way might have ridden police of a tricky PR issue over a story they now tired of by telling Jim to leave it to the Ministry.

[...]

Moreover, the MoD records recently released (see below) discussed by me in Fortean Times last year reveal that there was never an offcial conclusion of a lens flare in the second film. This was just a guess. No more. But I can see why it was made and would likely have made a similar obsevation myself - just as I did from Jim's similar looking second photo. But the MoD interest in this case - and their attitude revealed in these new files about my BBC documentary whilst making it in 96 - is odd.

[...]

I have no argument with your points. Yes, it is true that there was an aborted launch in the couple of weeks between the taking of the 'spaceman' photo and the Pathe film with the 'len flare' on it I discuss below. It is perfectly feasible that there was something stranger on that as nobody has seen it. Indeed the BBC archives of Blue Streak launches indicated that they once had footage of one of these launches but it had been removed from there and never returned.
-- A highly relevant, suspicion-inducing point that Jenny Randles only conceded when I pressed her on the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenny Randles
Hi, The genesis of the story about the images on the blue streak footage is complex. Just after the June visit of the strange men who used numbers not names he took a second photo on the marsh of what appeared to me to be a lens flare but has a sort of 'rising rocket' impression. He took it to the police to add to their ongoing investigation into the original photo and the two men who visited. The police (I suspect a bit wearily by now) told him to leave it be.

[...]

Okay, I wanted to reply to some of the points below. Firstly, the stories about Jim in contact with aliens and faking other UFO photos are, I presume, posted here as an attempt at humour. They are rubbish anyhow. Yes, Jim had made some jokey photos for talks and so on in the 60s. None were ever presented as real. The only other photo he took that he thought was a UFO was of a rocket like streak of light taken from the marshes a week or two after the 'spaceman' shot. This is as lens flare IMO.

[...]

the film from Woomera only shows what looks like a lens flare as the blue streak takes off. The launch is not aborted nor in the same month as Jim's photo. The cameraman reported they had a cover to guard against flares in the outback sun. So who knows? But there is nothing like a spaceman on it. In fact the film looks more like Jim's second photo taken later that summer on the marsh. This was a lens flare IMO. But as it was shown the police might be source for the Woomera confusion.

The police meant the second photo (the lens flare over the marsh). And there is indeed a very similar image captured by the cameras at Woomera during a blue strreak launch days after Jim's first photo (and before the second one as above). This Woomera shot also appears to be a lens flare IMO. The 'spaceman at Woomera' element seems to have evolved over time from a mistaken assumption that the police meant the Spaceman photo had been recreated at Woomera.
I think she is making a mistaken assumption herself here; it doesn't seem clear at all that Jim Templeton is confusing the lens flare event with the 'men on the launch pad' story. According to Templeton in two separate statements years apart, the police were not the source of the story as Randles asserts, but rather the Cumberland News editor/a letter from Woomera.

This from the Jenny Randles interview:

Jenny Randles: How do you think that image got onto the film?
Jim Templeton: Now then. The editor of the Cumberland News rang. "Can we borrow the negative; can we...we're going to fly a picture out to Woomera." They were firing Blue Streak rocket and apparently there's so many cameras watching, the monitors. And that fellow, and that fellow, suddenly saw the two lads, men in the firing area, dressed exactly like him (the figure in his photo). And the countdown was stopped. And they searched the area. Nobody was to be found. Now then, the men at Woomera knew nothing about this (Jim's photo). The picture went out onto the Australian newspaper. It had flashed from one newspaper to another. And it was seen on the front page in Australia, on the newspaper. And this fellow said: "Look, that's the bloke we saw on the monitors."

Also this from the letter he wrote to the Daily Mail in 2002:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Templeton
The only suggestion that struck a chord with me was a letter from Woomera in Australia which came a month after the picture was shown around the world.

The people there were keen to see a good colour copy of the photo, as they had stopped a countdown of the Blue Streak rocket within hours of my photo being taken.

Apparently, two similar looking 'spacemen' had been seen close to the rocket.
I'm suspecting the explanation for the apparent discrepancy between the version in which Jim 'received a phone call from the editor of the Cumerbland News' as stated in the Randles interview, and the Daily Mail version where he received 'a letter from Woomera in Australia which came a month after the picture was shown around the world' is that the letter from Woomera was sent to the editor of the Cumberland News (the original newspaper source of the photo) who then made a phone call to Jim and subsequently showed him or passed on the letter from Australia.

Last edited by size_of_light; 14-09-2014 at 10:14 AM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 12:28 AM   #64
yass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 9,551
Likes: 10 (8 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post
I've compiled Jenny Randles remarks over the course of a few years on the issues we're discussing from the youtube comments section under the clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAIEeufAdtw) - a lot of good, clarifying information here, assembled for the first time...

.

Quote:
Hi, The genesis of the story about the images on the blue streak footage is complex. Just after the June visit of the strange men who used numbers not names he took a second photo on the marsh of what appeared to me to be a lens flare but has a sort of 'rising rocket' impression. He took it to the police to add to their ongoing investigation into the original photo and the two men who visited. The police (I suspect a bit wearily by now) told him to leave it be.
Nice job compiling her comments SOL.

Are these pictures available on the Internet I wonder? They (It/they) might be interesting to filter (or not).
__________________
:*¨¨*:··:*¨¨*:··:*¨¨*:··:*¨¨*:·:*¨ ¨*:··:*¨¨*:

You've been up all night just listening for his drum
Hoping that the righteous might just might just might just might just come
I heard the general whispering to his aide de camp
Be watchful for Mohammed's lamp
yass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 12:33 AM   #65
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yass View Post
Nice job compiling her comments SOL.

Are these pictures available on the Internet I wonder? They (It/they) might be interesting to filter (or not).
Unfortunately they don't seem to be, yass.

Last edited by size_of_light; 14-09-2014 at 07:17 AM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 12:48 AM   #66
yass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 9,551
Likes: 10 (8 Posts)
Default

Okay, I'm intermittently searching. A couple results not sure the background but it's something for starters. 'Would be more thorough but multi-tasking atm.


http://spacemancentral.com/wp-conten...lue-streak.jpg
white-clad-men-launch-pad-woomera-blue-streak



http://spacemancentral.com/wp-conten...ra-300x231.jpg
bluestreak-woomera-launch-5-June-1964-lens-flare-camera
__________________
:*¨¨*:··:*¨¨*:··:*¨¨*:··:*¨¨*:·:*¨ ¨*:··:*¨¨*:

You've been up all night just listening for his drum
Hoping that the righteous might just might just might just might just come
I heard the general whispering to his aide de camp
Be watchful for Mohammed's lamp

Last edited by yass; 14-09-2014 at 12:49 AM.
yass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 09:29 AM   #67
thermion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 922 (603 Posts)
Default

Who now has the original negative of the Solway Firth Spaceman? I suppose it's now 'lost'.

Incidentally, this discussion has highlighted why I enjoy this and similar forums; I may not agree with many of the postings (often considering them ill-informed and/or preposterous), but sincere debate does force all sides to attempt coherent arguments. This often digs up fascinating and obscure information from the bowels of the internet to support a particular position.

I notice that no side usually capitulates, even when faced with overwhelming opposing evidence - human nature I guess...

Nevertheless, a great debate here. Anyone doing research into this matter (are you reading this Nick Redfern?) may like to follow up some of the data provided in this thread.

thermion
thermion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 07:23 PM   #68
agent of the free
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

I have a first generation re print from the actual negative ;-)
agent of the free is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 07:31 PM   #69
agent of the free
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

The figure is wearing a helmet he also has a round object on the centre of his chest that has a blue light emitting from it that can't be seen with the naked eye.
The visor of the helmet is doing its job by reacting to the light hence the dark patch right handside of face the left you can see light is passing behind the head in the helmet ? ;-)


http://michaelianblack.wix.com/thebl...spaceman/c137j
agent of the free is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 11:31 PM   #70
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Re-post of some stuff I put together in the past that I think is relevant...



Still photographs have recently surfaced from a film or video recording taken in circa 2006 in the Ongamira region in Argentina, north-east of the capital Buenos Aires, which shows beings of light coming out of the ground through a staircase or exit of light. The beings and the exit were not visible to the people present at the time of filming, but were only seen when the filmmaker looked at her images at home. Benjamin Creme has confirmed that the images are of Space Brothers (seen in the etheric) exiting a solid physical underground structure. Ongamira is in the Cordoba province of Argentina where, according to Benjamin Creme (Share International April 2000), local people interact with the Space Brothers based there. (Photographs: Monica Coll; source: analuisacid.com)

These beings seem to resemble - in both appearance and behavior - the 'entity' captured on a cellphone several years ago by a group of Peruvian schoolgirls in the haunting - but frustratingly little-seen (or known about outside of South America) - clip below...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un-pIZ_jDcY

The figures in both of these South American sightings were allegedly not seen with the naked eye; the Peruvian schoolgirls could only see the ghostly white figure walking away from them on the screen of the cellphone-camera one of them was holding, hence the spine-tingling screams heard in the video above once they realise they are witnessing something inexplicable...



Another anomalous case that shares these same elements is the famous - and still undebunked - 1964 Solway Firth spaceman photo.

Allegedly no one present when the photograph was taken knew of, or saw, the mysterious white figure in the background.



Three apparently isolated - but strikingly similar - incidences of mysterious phenomena connected for the very first time here.

That they do seem so plainly similar and yet have never been publicly linked until now, supports the notion that we're not looking at any kind of co-ordinated hoax, but rather at three different manifestations of the same genuine, otherworldly phenomena.







Another one of Dante Franch's book covers depicts one of his 'Space Brother' contacts radiating light from its head in a style very similar to that seen in the Wandjina cave art of Northern Australia...



While on the Wandjina subject, it would be remiss of me not to also include the following observation of the Queen's visit to NASA's Goddard Space Center in 2007.

The brooch she is wearing is known as the Centenary Brooch and was commissioned in honour of The Toad - er, the Queen Mother's 100th birthday.





Last edited by size_of_light; 15-09-2014 at 12:05 AM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2014, 11:35 PM   #71
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2014, 12:19 AM   #72
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
In Aboriginal mythology, the Wandjina were cloud and rain spirits who, during the Dreamtime, created or influenced the landscape and its inhabitants. When they found the place they would die, they painted their images on cave walls and entered a nearby waterhole.

Today, certain Aboriginal people of the Mowanjum tribes repaint the images to ensure the continuity of the Wandjina's presence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wondjina




Are we not 'repainting the images' with perfect fidelity on the quartz crystal of computers (i.e. cave walls) every time we re-post them online?

Last edited by size_of_light; 15-09-2014 at 04:27 PM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-10-2014, 03:25 AM   #73
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

'Spaceman' turns up on Margate beach
29 September 2014

Quote:



The spaceman was photographed on Sunday morning, walking on the sand near Marine Terrace.

Stunned onlookers watched the space-suited figure make his way along a concrete spit, heading out to sea, before turning back and walking across the sand.

Hayley Mollart, restaurant supervisor at the Sands Hotel, said staff on the breakfast shift spotted the spaceman on the beach.

But we can reveal the spaceman was part of a new music video shot for the low-fi pop band Elephant, by London-based production company Loveday - Valentine.


http://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/n...n-beach-24267/




--- Not sure I buy the 'music video' explanation.

More likely an over-exposed photograph of an absent-minded wife wearing a magical blue dress who accidentally photobombed a picture her husband was taking of the sea.

Any explanation is preferable to the one that suggests there is an unknown exotic figure wearing some kind of strange costume -- oh wait.

A music video, you say?

Oh, ok, phew. That's safe, er, I mean, fine.

Yes, of course it's somebody in an astronaut suit; I knew that all along!

Last edited by size_of_light; 19-10-2014 at 03:29 AM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.